Let's assume climate change as a direct result of human actions over the past 2 centuries is a fact.假设气候变化作为一个在过去的两个世纪人类行为的直接结果是一个事实。
Here's the problem: top scientists concede that even if the entire world stopped ALL greenhouse gas emissions today the planet will continue to heat up for many years (I've heard numbers ranging from 50 to 300 years).当前的问题是：顶尖科学家承认，即使整个世界停止所有温室气体排放今天的地球将继续升温多年了（我听说人数从50至300年不等）。 [1] [1]
So what?那又怎么样呢？
Well a lot of so called “solutions” for the global warming problem focus on either 1) reducing greenhouse gas emissions and/or 2) preparing vulnerable areas for rises in sea levels.好了很多所谓的“解决方案”的全球变暖问题上的重点是1）减少温室气体排放量和/或2）准备在海平面上升脆弱地区。
For example, take a look at the “Copenhagen Accord” that came out of the UN Climate Change Conference last year:例如，采取在“哥本哈根协定”，据来自联合国气候变化大会在去年看： http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Accord http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Accord . 。
These “defensive” strategies (reduction, adaptation, mitigation) are fine as a starting point but if stopping all greenhouse gas emissions today (something that is not going to happen) won't yield results for at least 50 years why should trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions be a priority?这些“防御”战略（减少，适应，缓解）的罚款作为出发点，但如果停止所有温室气体排放今日（事情是不会发生的）是不会为至少50年的结果，为什么要试图减少温室气体排放是一个优先事项？
It shouldn't.它不应该。
The answer, I believe, is to focus energy and money in “offensive” strategies.答案，我相信，是集中精力和财力，在“进攻”的战略。
If we are going to stop the negative effects of global warming we are going to need to invent technologies that can either eliminate huge amounts of greenhouse gases or convert them into useful products (without emitting any greenhouse gases).如果我们要阻止全球变暖我们将需要发明技术既可以消除大量温室气体，或转换成有用的产品，他们（不排放任何温室气体）的负面影响。
Inventing and deploying this type of technology won't be easy or cheap but it is absolutely necessary: if we don't do it our efforts to neutralize this threat to human civilization will be in vain.发明和部署这种技术将不容易也不便宜，但它是绝对必要的：如果我们不这样做我们的努力，以消除这一对人类文明的威胁将是徒劳的。
[1] [1] See看见 http://www.livescience.com/environment/050317_global_warming.html http://www.livescience.com/environment/050317_global_warming.html ; ; http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/2059.html http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/2059.html
{ 2 comments… read them below or （2条评论...阅读下面或他们 add one添加一个 } ）
The technology exists, and there are many simple and cheap methods of reversing global warming.该技术是存在的，有许多简单和廉价扭转全球变暖的方法。 Putting fine particulates or SO2 gas in the atmosphere in sufficient quantities (like from lots of coal plants without scrubbing the product gasses).摆在中（如无气体洗涤产品，从大量的燃煤电厂）足够数量的大气二氧化硫微粒或气体。 The problem isn't in how to reduce temperatures.问题不在于如何降低温度。 The problem is that darn “Law of Unintended Consequences.” Will we make things worse my trying to make them better?问题是，缝补法“的意想不到的后果。”我们会更糟糕，我努力使他们更好？
It's got nothing to do with weather or not the climate would continue to warm with or without our emmissions.它来没事与否的天气气候将继续温暖带或不带我们emmissions。 It has long been know that the earth cools and warms periodicly and that it should be getting warmer now anyway, the problem is the RATE at which it is getting warmer.人们早已知道，地球变冷，温暖periodicly，它应该是现在正在变暖无论如何，问题是它的速度正在变暖。 The climate can handle small increases in temperature over a long period of time and would adapt without much fuss, but with the emmisions that we are putting out increasing the rate of this warming we run the risk of creating an unstable climate which will likley cause a massive increase in dangerous extremes of weather.气候可以处理在一段长时期内温度的微小增加，会适应没有大做文章，但与emmisions我们为推出加强本变暖的速度运行，我们建立一个不稳定的气候，将导致风险likley大量增加，极端天气的危险。